140 replies to this topic

[C E Dwyer]

Don't use your Roughneck for LRM's.

Yes I have a much better Match score than you.

Want to use LRM's use a Night Gyr D with LRM-15A x4 LPL x1 and Tag.

[BurningDesire]

had a game of incursion where all that was left was a lrm roughneck that ran out on the enemy team and all we had was a mauler that ran out of ammo and had its laser arm blown off. the mating of mauler and roughneck was beautiful to behold, we spent 3 mins watching 2 mechs dry hump. too bad it was being narrated by an angry Russian calling the mauler stupid.
Run you Lurmburger roughneck its moments like above that make the game a treasure to behold sometimes

[Ted Wayz]

El Bandito, on 22 April 2017 - 08:41 PM, said:

As an avid LRM user, I get higher score than you per season. All I can say is, Roughneck is not built for LRM spams. RGH-1B and 1C both have no LRM quirks, and you are wasting its good durability quirks on an IDF build.

Actually getting more than 170 matchscore per season is easy for many players, so technically many of us are free to criticize you.

So happy you spent the time to look that up.

But that score mostly reflects my 6 MG King Crab build.

Cathy, on 23 April 2017 - 03:15 AM, said:

Don't use your Roughneck for LRM's.

Yes I have a much better Match score than you.

Want to use LRM's use a Night Gyr D with LRM-15A x4 LPL x1 and Tag.

On average, but in matches where we have dropped together?

Hmmm, where is Deathlike?

[Ted Wayz]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 22 April 2017 - 09:18 PM, said:

thats the players thats doing much damage for personel Score and no one kill to help the Team and win the Battle...what make this Player by ECM cover ? and with no massive Help from the team (Targetlocks)

Yes, that is what the other players are usually doing with their l33t builds.

Seriously, people should look at the scoreboard in a match before commenting. Trust me I would like someone other than a KDK3 with 2xUAC5 and 2XUAC10 who scores <100 on my team too.

[Ted Wayz]

BurningDesire, on 23 April 2017 - 03:29 AM, said:

had a game of incursion where all that was left was a lrm roughneck that ran out on the enemy team and all we had was a mauler that ran out of ammo and had its laser arm blown off. the mating of mauler and roughneck was beautiful to behold, we spent 3 mins watching 2 mechs dry hump. too bad it was being narrated by an angry Russian calling the mauler stupid.
Run you Lurmburger roughneck its moments like above that make the game a treasure to behold sometimes

This is why I augment my Lurmneck with MGs and 3000 rounds...

[The6thMessenger]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

So happy you spent the time to look that up.

But that score mostly reflects my 6 MG King Crab build.

Well, on this season (season 10), you still did 153 Average Match Score on Heavies only. I did 283 Average Match Score on Heavies. El Bandito did 360 Average Match Score.

BTW don't arm your King Crab like that, no wonder you plummeted at 170 average match score with that bad build. 000's best trait is the arm weapons it can load, it doesn't have much hardpoints on the torso for a good energy centric build or missile centric build. If you want SRMs on 000, there's not a lot of hard-points to go around, that it sucks at stripping armor.

Well you can load 2x LRM20As, and/or 2x LLs / LPLs / ERLLs, but you can fire 3x LLs w/o ghost heat, and 4x LRM40As are actually better due to tighter spread, and shorter cooldown. Not to mention the quirks

If you're after moar torso weapons, use other variants. KGC Lurm-Boat - 4x LRM10A + 3x LL + TAG, 15 DHS, mind you though, Assaults like King Crab are powerful LRM boats but not as effective cause they are very very slow. Being able to reposition quickly is one of the key traits required for an effective LRM boat, that which assaults generally lack.

In my experience, Timber Wolf, is the best LRM boat there is.

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

On average, but in matches where we have dropped together?

Do we really need to explain you the concept of "average", and why it's valid?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 23 April 2017 - 04:33 AM.

[Clownwarlord]

...

[El Bandito]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

So happy you spent the time to look that up.

But that score mostly reflects my 6 MG King Crab build.

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 03:46 AM, said:

This is why I augment my Lurmneck with MGs and 3000 rounds...

Your builds are bad, and you should feel bad. It is sad that none of these advice said by a dozen players do not reach your brain. With builds such as these, you will forever stay mediocre.

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

On average, but in matches where we have dropped together?

And judging by this reply of yours to Cathy, you are also dumb, by cherry picking scores rather than taking the average.

Edited by El Bandito, 23 April 2017 - 04:05 AM.

[Ted Wayz]

The6thMessenger, on 23 April 2017 - 03:48 AM, said:

Do we really need to explain you the concept of "average", and why it's valid?

You seem more mean than average.

El Bandito, on 23 April 2017 - 04:02 AM, said:

Your builds are bad, and you should feel bad. It is sad that none of these advice said by a dozen players do not reach your brain. With builds such as these, you will forever stay mediocre.

No, because all you have to do is play a lot to be l33t. Just ask PGI.

[El Bandito]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 04:04 AM, said:

No, because all you have to do is play a lot to be l33t. Just ask PGI.

And yet what is your tier after all these matches? I assume since you played a lot you must have reached T1, but you aint showing your tier. Could it be that you cannot accomplish something that is so simple and inevitable?

Edited by El Bandito, 23 April 2017 - 04:09 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 04:04 AM, said:

You seem more mean than average.

Oh, that was well played, for naught. But well played.

[The6thMessenger]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 04:03 AM, said:

You seem more mean than average.

Mean is a kind of "average", numnuts. But okay, let's call it "Mean", now what?

You're still left with a horrid about 170 of "mean match score", which indicates that you have widely inconsistent games, if you are having good games of about above 250 match score at all. If your mean match score is that low, yet you have match scores say 600 that pulls the "mean match score" down to 170, that means you have overwhelmingly more games where you did badly, than games than games that you did quite well.

Even if i gave you a theoretical 800 to 1200 match score, if your "mean match score" is only 170, that means the other games are even worse if it was able to pull your "mean match score" to 170. It ain't pretty to look at any other way.

Okay, what about some maths yeah?

If your mean match score is 170, at around 10 games. The sum should have been at a total of 1700 match score. Lets say that one game you did 600 match score, now the remaining 9 games you have a total of 1100 match score, and thus on the other 9 games you must've did 122.2222222222222 each.

Supposed that at the same amount of 1700 total match score of 10 games, you did 500 match score at 2 games, that means the other 8, you got 87.5 match score each.

Likewise if you did 250 match score on 5 games, leaving 450 on the remaining 5 games, you must've did 90 each.

and on, and on, and on.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 23 April 2017 - 04:46 AM.

[Ted Wayz]

El Bandito, on 23 April 2017 - 04:08 AM, said:

And yet what is your tier after all these matches? I assume since you played a lot you must have reached T1, but you aint showing your tier. Could it be that you cannot accomplish something that is so simple and inevitable?

Or maybe I don't play that much.

The6thMessenger, on 23 April 2017 - 04:12 AM, said:

Mean is a kind of "average", numnuts. But okay, let's call it "Mean", now what?

You don't get it. Ask Bud, he will explain it for you.

I did put Artemis on my LRM5's. Does that make it better?

[Alexander of Macedon]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 03:40 AM, said:

So happy you spent the time to look that up.

But that score mostly reflects my 6 MG King Crab build.

You're right. If we filter for only heavy 'mechs, your K/D drops to 0.40, your W/L to 0.63, and your average score to 144.

Looks like your troll MG King Crab outperforms your LRM Roughneck.

This is what I don't get about the people who try to brag about score derived from useless spread damage. So you want to be dead weight and sit at 800 firing missiles into rocks and decaying locks? Sure, fine, whatever, there are plenty of potatoes on the battlefield. But why do it in a 'mech that is so incredibly unsuited for it? At least have the grace to pick something like a Catapult or Archer that has quirks and hardpoints to support it, so that on the rare occasions where you fire on someone with LOS you'll be marginally effective.

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 06:05 AM, said:

I did put Artemis on my LRM5's. Does that make it better?

Artemis does nothing if you're firing without LOS.

Edited by Alexander of Macedon, 23 April 2017 - 06:23 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 06:05 AM, said:

Or maybe I don't play that much.


You don't get it. Ask Bud, he will explain it for you.

I did put Artemis on my LRM5's. Does that make it better?

Play how you want and have fun. If you're going to LRM with it though go for broke - 5s are not what they used to be. That head laser loc is above your cockpit. Go XL, go 40+ tubes and head tag and Artemis. Stand behind cover so you can barely TAG them over cover. The thing is nearly invisible and immune to return fire and your LRMs will hit tighter.

Stay close to your team so if you get pushed you've got people to cover you. 2 MLs are not going to save you in a brawl - if you're going to LRM go balls deep, get LoS, exploit the head mount for TAG. Don't cycle targets - start biggest to smallest and hound the SOB until he dies or ragequits. Don't switch to a light unless it's hounding your teammates.

The mech is a brutal brawler but if you're going to LRM, you need to bang it like a broken shutter in a hurricane.

[Ted Wayz]

Alexander of Macedon, on 23 April 2017 - 06:22 AM, said:

You're right. If we filter for only heavy 'mechs, your K/D drops to 0.40, your W/L to 0.63, and your average score to 144.

Looks like your troll MG King Crab outperforms your LRM Roughneck.

This is what I don't get about the people who try to brag about score derived from useless spread damage. So you want to be dead weight and sit at 800 firing missiles into rocks and decaying locks? Sure, fine, whatever, there are plenty of potatoes on the battlefield. But why do it in a 'mech that is so incredibly unsuited for it? At least have the grace to pick something like a Catapult or Archer that has quirks and hardpoints to support it, so that on the rare occasions where you fire on someone with LOS you'll be marginally effective.

Artemis does nothing if you're firing without LOS.

Not sure this thread is for you.

[Tarogato]

Wraith 1, on 22 April 2017 - 08:36 PM, said:

Okay.





Criticism: it has LRMs on it.

He has a higher WLR than you. His build contributes more toward winning. Therefore, your argument is invalid. Have a nice day.

[Ted Wayz]

Tarogato, on 23 April 2017 - 07:30 AM, said:

He has a higher WLR than you. His build contributes more toward winning. Therefore, your argument is invalid. Have a nice day.

LOL. He has a higher what?

The fallacy continues.

Edited by Ted Wayz, 23 April 2017 - 07:40 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Ted Wayz, on 23 April 2017 - 07:40 AM, said:

LOL. He has a higher what?

The fallacy continues.

Prior yours was lower but more matches will give a better sample size.

I'm not a big fan of throwing stats in peoples faces but I do think it's fair to say that if someone is going to say something works you need to be able to show that it works.

[Ted Wayz]

MischiefSC, on 23 April 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Prior yours was lower but more matches will give a better sample size.

I'm not a big fan of throwing stats in peoples faces but I do think it's fair to say that if someone is going to say something works you need to be able to show that it works.

And how do you do it by chassis? I have over 300 mechs and play all of them. Not fully mastered. Not using meta builds. Yet look at the leaderboards for newly released mechs and most of the time you will find me on them.

Because this game really isn't that hard and I have to look for ways to make it fun.

Yet people seem to think there is only one way to play. That if you are not running the optimal setup you are "hurting the team". No, being bad is what hurts the team. And because PSR is a XP bar tier covers up a lot of bad players. Yet people are saying they want them on their team because they are running an optimal build instead of my LRM KNT18 with a 1,53 W/L and 2.27 K/D. Really?

If you want to run the same chassis 5000 times be my guest. I will respect that as long as you respect my LRM Atlas. Especially if it outscores you in a match we are in.

Edited by Ted Wayz, 23 April 2017 - 08:02 AM.